ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED PROCEDURAL ORDER
Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Diesel Locomotive Works Dwl Varanasi
Income Tax Appeal No. 235 of 2014 ·
Supplied court order; no reported citation stated
Revenue appeal dismissed as not maintainable on the recorded historical low-tax-effect ground; no costs.
Division Bench · Bharati Sapru · Rohit Ranjan Agarwal
1. Facts of the case
In Income Tax Appeal No. 235 of 2014, counsel at the Bar submitted that the tax effect was below the monetary limit and the appeal could be dismissed as not maintainable. The supplied order gives no assessment year, issue on the tax merits or quantified tax effect.
2. Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The Court applied the historical monetary-limit ground, citing Circular No. 17/2019 dated 8 August 2019 and a CBDT communication dated 20 August 2019. It did not examine the assessment merits or compute tax effect.
3. Judicial decision
Income Tax Appeal No. 235 of 2014 was dismissed as not maintainable. No costs were ordered.
4. Outcome / in whose favour
The respondent obtained procedural dismissal of Revenue’s appeal, without a substantive tax merits determination.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
The source prints the second file reference with “M-93/218-ITJ”. That apparent year shortening is preserved rather than silently corrected; the dated communication is reported as the Court cited it. Verify the complete applicable circular and later proceedings before reliance. No current threshold or broader tax ratio is represented.
Source and verification
Complete supplied one-page order read and visually inspected. Actual individual Drive original SHA-256 independently verified; complete text compared with the preserved review packet. AY, PAN and a tax-effect computation are not stated. Subsequent treatment and current law are not cleared.
Source SHA-256: 46be4a12a3f7e006457fca80ee19888e40334b5e3d7204450f7a2a50d585ff5f
Only provisions expressly identified in this order are recorded. No substantive tax merits or current statutory equivalence is inferred.
Source checked 2026-10-19. Later proceedings, compliance and current precedential treatment have not been comprehensively verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.